Glider

If it was a wave of lava, we could use that now redundant wave of water.

True, but they're not organs.We don't have any organs that 'stick out'. Waste from the liver passes straight into the blood stream and out through the kidneys.

Horrible grammar! Then why didn't you? No, it is not. As I have said, if you wish to be understood, or at least to avoid misunderstanding, it is for you to make yourself clear and not for others to compensate for your bad writing.

They don't have computers in Rapid City, South Dakota?

Absurd here too.

I think they are taught in the context of 'if we want to know where we're going, we need to know where we've come from', rather than a 'listen up guys, this is how things actually are' kind of thing. The history of Psychology is an integral part of teaching modern Psychology. The problem is that so many students (as with most other lay people) have no real idea what Psychology is about and enrol thinking they're going to spend three years in dingy coffee shops arguing about Jung and Freud. These students seem unablt to tell the difference between the history and the modern approach and also have the greatest problem with the science components. This year in the UK, under a government directive, schools have begun to teach A level Psychology as a science. I'm hoping this results in the enrolment of students with a more realistic idea of Psychology.

I know of only one kind of sensory receptor cell that comes into direct contact with the external environment: the chemoreceptors lining the nasal cavity and on the tongue. All others are internal. Cochleal mechanoreceptorss are in the inner ear, photoreceptors are in the retina and all skin touch receptors are dermal or subdermal.

Then you won't mind if we challange the traditional approach to understanding and fail to understand anything you say? Of course, if you wish to be understood, it might be wise to use traditional forms of communication. Most of the scientists I know are clear, concise and precice in their use of language. It comes with the job as they know that the onus is always on the author to make to their meaning clear and never on the reader to attempt to divine meaning from garbled text. If the reader fails to understand what is written, it is always the fault of the author.

Only for those who would need to interact with people on a deeper level: counsellors, therapists, clinical psychologists and the like. It wouldn't be a problem for researchers.

Essentially, yes. Hostility is a personality trait, agression is a behavioural manifestation of hostility, either verbal or physical (both are behavioural).

I'm afraid I can't be of much help here. I don't know of any agression questionnaires that follow the format you're after. I think the problem might be that agression is a behaviour rather than a personality trait, and it's very tricky to get valid and reliable measures of behaviour using questionnaires. There are plenty of questionnaires that measure hostility, which is a personality characteristic that would result in agressive behaviour, but that's probably not what you're after.

Looking at the date of the original post, I would say duchess is in the last semester of her third year by now.

Whilst you can find many images of the brain in books and 3D models on line, it's unlikely you'll find exactly what you want because the assumption that "folds in the brain are interfaces by which different structures in the brain communicate with each other" is incorrect. Only a few of the topographical features on the cerebral cortex are universal (e.g. central sulcus, pre and post central gyri, Sylvian fissure etc.). Beyond these exceptions, the pattern of gyri and sulci differ between individuals, so each brain is unique in terms of surface topography. The folding of the cortex is simply the way to fit a relatively flat structure (6 cells deep) of a comparitively large area into a roundish container that is smaller in diameter than the area of the cortex. Interfaces between different regions of the cortex exist within the cortical layers. Pyramidal cells take input from wide areas of the cortex and sends it to local cells. Granular cells do the reverse; they conduct information from local areas and project their axons over wide areas. Information from particular regions devoted to specific functions passes to association areas via specific tracts. No two gyri interface directly simply by virtue of being in close proximity (i.e. either side of a sulcus). For example, two gyri that are universal (i.e. appear in all human brains) are the precentral and post central gyri (primary motor cortex and primary somatosensory cortex respectively). These reside in close proximity on either side of the central sulcus, but they do not communicate directly and are specific to different functions. Integration of sensory and motor functions happens elsewhere in the brain. Remember also that the innermost meninx (pia mater) covers the brain surface in close contact and lines the sulci (and even the paths of cortical blood vessels), further insulating gyri from one another.

Some more than others, evidently.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. Are you talking about growing cabbages or composting?

Burning things that have grown is essentially carbon neutral. It releases only the carbon is has taken up during its growth. However, burning plant matter also releases particulates and other less pleasant substances. If you compost them, they will take ages to break down, but they will eventually. Hot composting would speed the process considerably. What results is excellent for putting back into the soil or as a mulch. Whether or not you cut them by hand or put them through a shredder or chipper depends on how much there is. As I say, burning waste from crops is more or less carbon neutral, but it does produce other pollutants and is a bit of a waste. If you have a large compost area you can mix the cuttings with other material and just leave them. If the heap is more than 1 cubic metre and you get the mix right, hot composting will happen and things break down rapidly then.

True, and the reasons why the original question is difficult to answer are that: 'Jerk' is not a defined personality type and I think everybody is rude or arrogant or insulting (deliberately or otherwise) or condescending at some time according to somebody. So the question boils down to 'why are people people'? There's quite a lot of research on that.

Ok, whatever you say.

The data exist in the field of Obstetrics and medicine in general (see for example Leong, A. (2006) Sexual dimorphism of the pelvic architecture: A struggling response to destructive and parsimonious forces by natural & mate selection. McGill Journal of Medicine. 9: 61-66. ). Sexual selection is a powerful force in species morphology. Consider it ‘Turbo Evolution’. Sexual selection can bring about comparatively rapid changes in a population. For example, look what we have done with plants by deliberately selecting specimens with ‘desirable’ qualities. Hundreds of new cultivers appear each year. Look also at the results of the process in animals such as dogs, cats, horses, cattle, sheep and so-on. Changes that left to random selection would take millions of years can be forced in a few generations. Those are deliberate manipulations, but the same thing can be seen on the wild. For example, look at the anole lizards of Cuba, where groups of the same species were separated due to elevated sea levels. There are now many distinct sub-populations. Look also at Darwin’s finches of the Galapagos Islands. The same thing happens in humans. There are natural forces, of course, but these take a lot longer for effects to occur. Mate selection on the other hand is an incredibly fast and effective driving force for change. I should have been more specific though. I never meant all females. Sexual selection is itself driven by social ideals and these differ between cultures (and change over time). The social ideal in the west has been for more slender females. This is driven by a number of factors; the emphasis and value placed on ‘eternal youth’ in the West and the almost pathologically underdeveloped body form that is presented as the ideal in the fashion world for example. No, not in all females, but within distinct sub-populations, particularly in the West (e.g. UK). Ten generations is easily enough for sexual selection to produce measurable change. This is because sexual selection driven by cultural ideals in a lot more specific than natural selection. It rules out variation by definition. I should point out that sexual selection is not the only driving force, there are nutritional factors also and the increasing levels of sex hormones entering the (intensively farmed and processed) food chain. Yes, sorry, my bad (see above). The price of a surgical procedure is not grounds for performing it. I would question the ethics and legality of performing a surgical procedure simply because it costs more. In the UK the higher cost of a surgical procedure is actually grounds for avoiding it if possible (UK hospitals being under so much pressure to keep to budget). Further, labour wards in the UK do not charge the patient (which is why we are subject to so many ‘Health Tourists’, particularly, in the case of labour, from the USA). Performing invasive surgery that is not necessary is malpractice. In the UK surgical sections are done only where necessary as they carry their own inherent risks. Moreover there is an increasing trend for ‘natural births’ and surgical sections (as with all invasive procedures) require informed consent, which can be withheld. You seem to have a somewhat tenuous grasp of ethicolegal concepts in medicine. Under no circumstance is the practitioner’s ’convenience’ grounds for surgery. Tea time even less so. (note the spelling). ’Can schedule when to have the birth’? Hmmm. There are plenty of analgesic drugs and procedures available and these are often requested. In fact, women very rarely ‘demand’ surgical section (at least in the UK). It leaves a scar. It tends to be left until there are signs of foetal distress or where scans have shown that there is little chance of a natural birth. Which kind of supports my point. Because surgical section as a procedure is available, males can continue to select waiflike partners and avoid the natural consequences of trying to push larger babies through smaller spaces. Whilst surgical intervention not the first recourse in labour (at least in this country), it is becoming more frequently necessary as difficult births become more common, due largely to the increasingly android female pelvis in Western sub-populations.

It's not only natural selection that plays a role either. Sexual selection plays a large role in evolution, and the selection by males of thinner females (as the social ideal changed) has resulted in a the narrowing of female pelvic girdles over the last 200 years or so. Births are becoming more difficult and the necessity of medical/surgical intervention more frequent.

AARRRGGGHH!! It's his eyes!! THEY'RE GOING FOR HIS EYES!!!

It does to me too, so I suppose the best advice would be, whatever you do, be careful.

It has always worked in my experience. It also fosters the trust that's supposed to exist between a tutor and students (which makes students more likely to approach their tutor with problems). For the students to be given the opportunity to discuss and decide such things for themselves is also part of the University's role in preparing them for adult (and graduate) life. In my classes, we have a policy of 'What is said in this room, stays in this room'. Whilst obviously I still have to be careful (student will talk, even if only to other students), it does give them a chance to get things off their chests (once they come to trust the system). By the late 1st year, early second year, they are telling me all kinds of things. Usually it's just a chance for them to bitch about things in general, and sometimes other lecturers (that's fine. I'm sure some bitch about me too). Occasionally it'll raise a more serious issue and that gives me a chance to address it and possibly do something about it (whilst protecting the anonymity of the source) before it gets out of hand. More often though, once things are out in the open and subject to feedback from other students, problems just seem to dissolve, which is handy. It also means that if an individual student has a serious problem, they are more likely to come to me with it rather than than just keeping quiet until it overwhelms them.

I have never heard of black history month, so I know nothing about it. However, I do see how this puts you in a difficult position ethically (which puts them in the wrong straight away), and yes, I do think there is a valid concern. As I say, I know nothing about black history month, but my University is London based and has a very ethically mixed student body. I think that if I were asked to 'recommend' one or more of my 'more promising' students (of whatever ethnicity) for anything in something called 'Black History Month' alarm bells would ring and I would want to know exactly what it was for before I did so. Is there a risk that this might be seen as an exercise in tokenism? A kind of 'Look how well our 'ethnic' students are doing' PR thing? I should point out that I work in the Psychology dept. and we are all Psychologists as well as lecturers and so we are bound by the British Psychological Society (BPS) codes of conduct. I think in this situation, I would rely on the BPS guidelines (that way, the University would have very little grounds for argument). I would use the principle of informed consent here. I am, in effect, being asked to 'volunteer' one of my students for something presumably not directly conected to their learning? Well, I don't have the right to do that, but I can ask them to volunteer. For them to volunteer, I am required to provide them with all salient information that would allow them to come to an informed decision and provide (or withold) their consent based upon that decision. If the University does not provide me with the salient information, then I have no right to ask the student(s) to volunteer for anything. As it stands, with the little information you have, you could just talk to your students and see how they feel about it. Tell them what you know and tell them what you don't know and why you don't know it and let them make their own choices.

Whatever plants you grow, they will transpire (i.e. release water through pores on their leaves). This will result in elevated humidity. All plants do this. It's why greenhouses have such a high relative humidity. You will need to provide adequate ventilation to solve the problem. An extractor fan in the wall should deal with it. The air inside the room needs to be changed regularly. An extractor fan (the kind you find in kitchens and bathrooms) would vent the humid air out and keep the humidity more or less the same as the outside air.